How would you build a team around Devin Harris?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Mar 6 2008, 05:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I saw your response... it's the same one I would give which is basically there is too many unknowns to answer. Where are the Nets going to pick in the draft? What can they get for some of these bigs who are all decent, but none can shoot a 12 ft jumper or create a shot in the post? What can they get for Jefferson, Carter or Harris? Can they get something in a S&T with Boki?

We don't know enough about what's available to build. I know they need a low-post presence and some shooters.</div>

With all of these various assets (players and picks), which ones are the key ones to you to use to make decisions? Also, how long would you wait to make direction changing decisions?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Mar 6 2008, 06:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Netted @ Mar 6 2008, 05:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I saw your response... it's the same one I would give which is basically there is too many unknowns to answer. Where are the Nets going to pick in the draft? What can they get for some of these bigs who are all decent, but none can shoot a 12 ft jumper or create a shot in the post? What can they get for Jefferson, Carter or Harris? Can they get something in a S&T with Boki?

We don't know enough about what's available to build. I know they need a low-post presence and some shooters.</div>

With all of these various assets (players and picks), which ones are the key ones to you to use to make decisions? Also, how long would you wait to make direction changing decisions?
</div>
All of the assets are keys to decisions. Everything has a value. All depends on whats available. I wouldn't make change just to make change and take back 10 cents on the dollar, but I wouldn't hesitate to do anything for the right pieces.

Not sure what you mean about how long to wait to make direction changing decisions. I think that time came a couple months ago and the serious discussions with other teams need to happen in June.

Currently, on a scale of least important to me to most valuable (combo of trade value and team importance):
Armstrong <- least important
2008 2nd rd pick
Swift
Ager
Hassell
Nachbar
Diop
2008 Dallas 1st rd pick
Boone
M. Williams
S. Willams
2008 Nets 1st rd pick
Krstic
Carter
Jefferson
Harris <- most valuable

Wild cards that can move up or down: Marcus, Nenad, Ager and the Nets pick depending how high it goes. The top 3 are all pretty close.

 

without really reading the previous post on this thread... id personally make a run at gilbert or elton... both are UFA... and with a trade of jefferson somewhere we would have the cap flexibility to pull it off...

with gilbert he can be a 1 or 2... but hes such a great shooter .. and so CLUTCH... he has that killer instinct and he wants the ball in the end of the game.

now brand... he has post moves and he demands the double... and its so much harder to find a legit big man in this league... but of course if we go after brand... we need a set shooter...!!!

 

OK, now I'm home.

I am a proponent of getting the centerpiece of the team in place first and building from there.

I think gathering complimentary pieces and then trying to find a championship-level player to add to fit those pieces is the exact wrong way to build a title team.

That said, you have to have players on your roster. You can't throw cap space out there to play.

So during the rebuilding or retooling process it's important to identify what kind of players will be most likely to fit with any type of roster and develop those players.

That's why I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing to hang onto Devin Harris.

First of all, good defenders are always in style. Nobody has ever wanted to get rid of a player for being too good defensively no matter what style the team plays. Harris has demonstrated in high-pressure playoff situations that he can guard star players and get his team stops. That's a valuable, tough-to-find asset to have - especially in such a young player - if the goal is to win it all.

Second, he is a versatile offensive player who can fit a variety of different styles. He can penetrate and dish in the half court. He can create his own shot and get to the rim. He's great at pushing the ball in transition. Whether the star the Nets eventually get is a big man or a Kobe-style initiator, Harris will have an important offensive role that he will be able to perform well.

Third, Harris is still developing. He has not reached his full potential and many feel (and this is why his value around the league is so high) that the underdeveloped parts of his game (distribution, court awareness, jump shooting) are improving and will eventually become assets.

Finally, Harris is a hard worker. He plays with intensity and it's not hard to envision him as a team leader in the future. I'm not a big "intangibles" guy, but a good litmus test (that I think many teams have actually started using) is the "Spurs Test". As in "Would the Spurs commit to having this guy on their roster long-term?" I think he passes that test.

I agree with the premise that Harris' value is high and a lot of that value is based only on potential. That screams "trade!" But if no incredible offers come along or there is opportunity to gather assets and dump salary another way (*ahem*, the 6th leading scorer in the league - hint, hint) I don't think it would be a terrible thing to stick with Harris and see what shakes out.

 

I'm very much of the opinion we throw a bunch of stuff on the floor and we see what works. We are in a transition period where maybe we can squeak into the playoffs but we really shouldn't and hopefully won't to help in the grand scheme of things. Getting a nice lottery pick this year could be pretty helpful in getting us a player who can help create a vision for this team or be an asset to trade with. Everything depends on where the ping pong balls fall before we can seriously discuss what road we're headed down.

The Nets as they're currently constructed have 2 starters (RJ and VC) and a whole lot of players that should be coming off the bench on any other team.

It's no secret Thorn would like to move RJ and VC but their contracts make it pretty tricky.
I like the idea of moving carter first only to force the ball into Devin's hands for him to take a shot at being the man for this team. VC is a crutch for Frank. I'm not saying the results will be pretty but necessary in in the learning process IMO. Reality is RJ's the easier to move simply off of age and probably will be if anyone offers a decent player and a low first rounder for him.

Our most sought after players are Sean, Diop, Devin, Boone, and Krstic (pending he doesn't suffer any setbacks) in that order. I like keeping all but Nenad as he could fetch us some nice 2/3 depth or be a nice side piece to a VC or RJ deal. Diop will probably get another nice offer where the Nets will be forced into a sign and trade because of the cap but i'd really like to see a good competition between Diop/Boone/and Sean as they get acclimated to Devin to see what kind of chemistry they can form.

Swift and Boki need to go IMO. Swift bought out and Boki sign and traded or just let walk away as he's not worth anything more than he's being paid now. Both have low to no value IMO.

Marcus is the wild card because he could play himself into tricking another team into giving us more than he's worth through blaming Frank for holding him back.

Trenton is serviceable and could be used to match up salaries using one of our young players as bait.

Armstrong and Ager can just walk away.

The opportunities for us to capitalize on aren't there yet. Who knows who could be available by the summer and who knows what kind of interest our players can drum up by then. We got Devin why not give him a shot? Is that to say we build around him? Not necessarily but his upside beats out his worst case scenario IMO where he might as well and if something better comes along than so be it. I'm sure the goal is to surround him with equally quality additions where we have a nice deep team and he has a reasonable enough of a contract to do just that.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Mar 6 2008, 05:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ Mar 6 2008, 04:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Mar 6 2008, 03:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ Mar 6 2008, 03:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'm not sold on running Devin as a 2 guard. As a SG he'd be pretty one dimensional in our offense, because he's at his best with the ball in his hands; cutting to the basket or pulling up for a three; not coming off a screen for a catch-and-shoot. Plus until Vince leaves, this is really a moot point regarding significant minutes.

Once he does leave, and there's an opportunity to start both Devin and Marcus (provided of course no SG draft or FA signing gets in the way, which is, however, a decent possibility) I'd prefer to start Marcus at SG. He's the one who's demonstrated the better ability to catch-and-shoot along with drive to the basket; albeit not as well as Devin, and certainly his game makes him a glorified combo-guard and not a true SG.</div>

So you are comfortable with a future backcourt of Devin and Marcus as the starters?
</div>

Now? No. While I think that Marcus can get better (and am impressed that he's kept up a pretty steady level of play since the trade), he's not at the point where he's a starting guard in this league. On PG his decision making isn't there, and his shot isn't at the level I like for a starting SG. Doesn't mean he can't improve on one of these, but right now, no.

Rather, if the Nets cannot draft a SG who can be a starter once Vince is gone, I would rather put Devin at point and Marcus at SG if that is the situation.
</div>

When is Vince gone in your scenario?


</div>

That's too up in the air right now what with the rumors. If Vince is traded a guy can come in immediately and get playing time, and he starts at SG over Marcus so that Marcus can be our 2nd string PG as he is now. If Vince sticks around through his contract that we've got a harder decision on our hands: whether this hypothetical SG is ready to step up to starter after ~4 years as being a back up, or if we have to run that Devin-Marcus combo in the back court.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (reganomics813 @ Mar 6 2008, 07:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Armstrong and Ager can just walk away.

The opportunities for us to capitalize on aren't there yet. Who knows who could be available by the summer and who knows what kind of interest our players can drum up by then. We got Devin why not give him a shot? Is that to say we build around him? Not necessarily but his upside beats out his worst case scenario IMO where he might as well and if something better comes along than so be it. I'm sure the goal is to surround him with equally quality additions where we have a nice deep team and he has a reasonable enough of a contract to do just that.</div>

I don't know I think Ager has a spot on our team. At the very least he offers depth, and I don't think you can ask for much more in a 15th-type man than what Ager brings to the table. Also, his potential might not be through the roof, but I like his role as an athletic wing who could shoot the ball in college. He's like a second chance on Antoine Wright.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ Mar 6 2008, 08:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't know I think Ager has a spot on our team. At the very least he offers depth, and I don't think you can ask for much more in a 15th-type man than what Ager brings to the table. Also, his potential might not be through the roof, but I like his role as an athletic wing who could shoot the ball in college. He's like a second chance on Antoine Wright.</div>

The main reason I say he's gone is because he's looking for PT and because we can feasibly draft a player as good if not better than him with Dallas' pick. We're getting a look at him now and if he's worth bringing back they will (Agers getting the min whoever he goes) especially if they feel he deserves the chance to crack the rotation but if not he should be let go for someone who has a chance of doing so. This is the time we stockpile assets and Mo simply isn't much of one even if he has some potential. We need to bring in the guys who can push the players we have to reach new levels or back to the bench where a lot of them belong and will ultimately provide our team with great depth. Being a pretty good 15th man at this point isn't something the team needs IMO.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (reganomics813 @ Mar 6 2008, 09:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ Mar 6 2008, 08:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I don't know I think Ager has a spot on our team. At the very least he offers depth, and I don't think you can ask for much more in a 15th-type man than what Ager brings to the table. Also, his potential might not be through the roof, but I like his role as an athletic wing who could shoot the ball in college. He's like a second chance on Antoine Wright.</div>

The main reason I say he's gone is because he's looking for PT and because we can feasibly draft a player as good if not better than him with Dallas' pick. We're getting a look at him now and if he's worth bringing back they will (Agers getting the min whoever he goes) especially if they feel he deserves the chance to crack the rotation but if not he should be let go for someone who has a chance of doing so. This is the time we stockpile assets and Mo simply isn't much of one even if he has some potential. We need to bring in the guys who can push the players we have to reach new levels or back to the bench where a lot of them belong and will ultimately provide our team with great depth. Being a pretty good 15th man at this point isn't something the team needs IMO.
</div>

I wouldn't mind keeping a young prospect, and I don't see anything wrong with having him fight someone for bench minutes. If your solution is bringing in a veteran player rather than build on a young foundation then it sounds like the same Nets ideology we've had the past couple of years. We've got to keep in mind that this is all in the context of THRON running the team (albeit with some Kikipedia influence). I'm a bit tired of seeing us get rid of the Hassan Adams and stocking our team with the Padgetts, Murrays, and Allens.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GMJigga @ Mar 6 2008, 10:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I wouldn't mind keeping a young prospect, and I don't see anything wrong with having him fight someone for bench minutes. If your solution is bringing in a veteran player rather than build on a young foundation then it sounds like the same Nets ideology we've had the past couple of years. We've got to keep in mind that this is all in the context of THRON running the team (albeit with some Kikipedia influence). I'm a bit tired of seeing us get rid of the Hassan Adams and stocking our team with the Padgetts, Murrays, and Allens.</div>

You didn't see any mumbling of vets from me. I'm saying i'm all for young prospects. I'm just not sold on Ager being one worth really putting the time into. Now granted i'm not seeing him day in and day out either and the Nets brass will ultimately make that call for us as. His PT this season is no real indication of what he could actually do for us with how long it takes to get acclimated to our system and the flying by the seat of his pants Frank is currently doing, this I understand. My point is that we will have, in all likeliness, 2 first rounders this season and I put good money on a wing player being available at either one of those spots that could be an even better addition than what Ager could bring to us is all. I'll have no problem being wrong about this btw, actually i'd welcome it.

 

In my opinion, the Devin Harris-Marcus Williams tandem will be good enough to be able to produce a successful team. You can argue that you can get good value for either one or both of those guys, but I would see a PG change as a low priority at this point. Marginal improvements, at best. Both have strengths and weaknesses, and as a tandem they could compliment each other fairly well. I'd be happy to take Armstrong back next year if he doesn't retire, or some other veteran PG who'll come cheap and not complain about his minutes.

I'm not ready to jump ship on Vince. I'm still not convinced that his game is deteriorating. As FOMW has detailed, there are signs that his struggles are injury related. Note also that he is significantly worse in the second of back-to-back games than when he has had more rest, which further substantiates that claim. We won't know for sure until next year, but I see no reason to try to deal him if there's even a chance that he'll return to the Vince Carter of the last two years, when he was pretty stunning offensively.

Boone-Sean-Krstic-Diop is a decent enough front-court, assuming that Krstic is returned by the aliens that abducted him. I go back and forth on whether I want to keep Krstic, but it appears it will happen--there was an article on yahoo! a day or so ago that wasn't listed by nets daily that kind of suggested that he'll be back with the Nets next year. There's no star power here. No impact player. I obviously like Boone and think he's a good complimentary player who is smart and works hard. I'm not sure what Sean will develop into. I'd love to add a significant frontcourt scoring threat to this group, but that's just unrealistic. You can't find those guys, which is why I think Krstic will be back. I'd package Sean for someone more polished, but I'm not sure how much of an upgrade it'll be. Is it worth dealing Sean for someone like Wilcox? Diop has impressed me, though. I'd trade Sean before Boone. Sean may never figure out how to play, while Boone knows his strengths and limitations and plays solid defense. Swift is close to worthless--he's better than John Thomas--and he'll be impossible to deal, so I expect him to be back unless he has Rodney Rogers' agent. The Nets won't buy him out.

RJ is a mess and I'd be happy to deal him. For what? For who? No idea.

The bench swingman reserves, Hassell, Boki, and Ager, are a disaster. I think the Nets are stuck with Hassell unless they combine him in a deal with Sean for a better PF. I like Boki but I'd let him go and hope to replace him with a better shooting, better defensive free agent. I'd like to see Ager have a chance to contribute, but we haven't really gotten a chance to see him at all. He's probably a dime a dozen.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Mar 6 2008, 11:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (razel231 @ Mar 6 2008, 11:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Mar 6 2008, 10:41 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Devin Harris was the centerpiece of the Kidd trade and is signed to a long term contract. If you were running the Nets FO, how would you build a team around him?</div>
With exactly what we have right now but with the addition of a true shooter. We'd also need a post up big but they don't grow on trees. If you're talking about tearing the whole thing down, then the team will also need to trade either RJ or Carter, whoever can fetch the most in a trade on any given day.
</div>

A true shooter coming off the bench or in the starting lineup? If in the starting lineup, who goes out of it?

Most post up bigs require a high number of offensive touches per game to be effective. Are you thinking the team would be a half court oriented offense?
</div>
Unless we give up RJ or VC for this hypothetical shooter there would be no way said shooter would displace anyone on the starting lineup.

A big who can post up would be able to open up the lanes for slashers or the perimeter for shooters making the defense play honest. I don't see this team as having the full complement of players to run a fast break offense so a half court offense would seem to be the only other option. The team can still fast break when the situation calls for it from RJ and Devin but the old offensive scheme needs to go to fit the mix of personnel we have.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GrandKenyon6 @ Mar 6 2008, 02:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Devin Harris isn't someone you build a team around. He's more of a piece to the puzzle player than a building block. The Nets will probably try to build around him but will fail unless the ping pong balls are especially kind.

Forget LeBron James. There is less than a 3% chance of that happening. Players of that magnitude don't leave their teams via free agency. Ever. He will not get to the market. Chances are you can't name the last true superstar to leave his team via free agency. I hate this cap space argument. Cap space can't buy championships, sorry. Look at where cap space has gotten Charlotte and Atlanta. Orlando is now locked into mediocrity for the foreseeable future because of their ludicrous commitment to Rashard Lewis. Did the Spurs, Lakers, Mavs, Pistons, or Celtics build their teams through cap space? No. Teams are built through the draft and through trade. Cap space is useful for signing the 2nd tier players and the complementary players needed to take the next step, not for starting from scratch. Even if NJ had all the money in the world to spend, there is no guarantee that the player(s) they target would want to sign with them anyway. And really, who in their right mind would want to play for a pathetic franchise with no fans that's treading water until the move to Brooklyn anyway? Now, I'm not advocating piling up massive contracts and becoming the Knicks. Cap space is certainly good to have. I'm just saying that trying to build a team by getting as far under the cap as possible is a recipe for failure. The Nets may go that route to try and get LeBron James, but I'll bet all my marbles they won't get him. At the end of the day all that strategy will leave the Nets with is a bunch of unspent money, not the King. And that money will probably be spent later on overpaying 2nd tier players who won't put the team any closer to a championship.

Anyway, now that I'm done with my rant, the Nets absolutely have to dump Jefferson. RJ is expired. He's past his usefulness. His numbers have gone up, but in reality his play has regressed since the sensational end of the '03-'04 season and beginning of the '04-'05 one. Jefferson is now just a trigger happy, defenseless wing with very limited ball handling skills and the inability to create his own shot or penetrate like he used to. Closing the book on NJ's glory years is the first step towards regaining competitiveness.

Since everyone else has had their pipe dream, I think I'll give it a go now. If the Nets can somehow pry Turkoglu from Orlando, he would be the perfect complement to Devin Harris. He's got good size and is an excellent shooter with good ball handling skills and the ability to create his own shot, drive, run the floor, finish, and post up. He can make plays as well and can take some of the pressure off Harris. Obviously he benefits tremendously from the spacing that Dwight Howard's presence provides, but if the Nets were able to obtain him he would instantly improve the team's shooting and force opponents to play honest defense.

How about Jefferson and a first round pick for Turkoglu and Tony Battie? Would Orlando do it? I doubt it considering they would be giving up their primary play maker and go to guy in the clutch, but I can dream. Hedo has 2 years left on his contract with a player option for the second year. He's probably going to want to cash in. This trade minimally affects the Magic's salary cap and Jefferson is a nice alternative to losing Turkoglu for nothing. They get a first round pick in the deal as well. </div>
Shaquille O'Neal?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BrooklynBound @ Mar 7 2008, 08:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Shaquille O'Neal?</div>

Well, seeing as how we cut Magloire, I suppose Shaq could take up the "walking corpse" role for our team...

 

RJ for Josh Childress. He's starting to come around. A great hustle player. Someone to snag rebounds and follow-up on misses. He's a good ball handler and his shot % and selection is improving every year. Good go-to guy for Devin.

 

You dont build a team around Devin Harris
He is just a piece that you need to have to be succesful
He is not the most important part.
We dont have one right now.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScoringPG1850 @ Mar 7 2008, 11:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>RJ for Josh Childress. He's starting to come around. A great hustle player. Someone to snag rebounds and follow-up on misses. He's a good ball handler and his shot % and selection is improving every year. Good go-to guy for Devin.</div>

RJ for a signed-and-traded Childress and an expiring contract would be great. I'm not even sure I'd want a pick in return.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScoringPG1850 @ Mar 7 2008, 10:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>RJ for Josh Childress. He's starting to come around. A great hustle player. Someone to snag rebounds and follow-up on misses. He's a good ball handler and his shot % and selection is improving every year. Good go-to guy for Devin.</div>


And he has the perfect fro!